Rohingya Muslims, who travelled from Myanmar into Bangladesh, stretch their arms out to collect food items distributed by aid agencies near Balukhali refugee camp, Bangladesh, Monday, Sept. 18, 2017. Bangladesh has been overwhelmed with more than 400,000 Rohingya who fled their homes in the last three weeks amid a crisis the U.N. describes as ethnic cleansing. Refugee camps were already beyond capacity and new arrivals were staying in schools or huddling in makeshift settlements. AP/Dar Yasin

MANILA, Philippines (Update 2, 10:51 a.m.) — Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano over the weekend released a statement as the chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations on the crisis in Rakhine state without referring to violence against Rohingya Muslims.

Malaysia, a predominantly Muslim nation and a member of ASEAN, disassociated itself from the ASEAN chairperson’s position and described it as a “misrepresentation of the reality of the situation.”

Malaysia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Anifah Aman, in a strongly worded disavowal, said Cayetano’s statement “was not based on consensus.”

“The statement (of Cayetano) also omits the Rohingyas as one of the affected communities,” Aman said in a statement on Sunday.

Before the chair’s statement, ASEAN has kept mum on the crisis involving Bangladesh and member-state Myanmar. Even rarer still is Malaysia’s public opposition in the Southeast Asian bloc known for its “flexible engagement,” “non-interference” and consensus.

Alan Peter Cayetano, the Philippines’ foreign affairs secretary, addresses the general debate of the General Assembly’s 72nd session on Sept. 23, 2017 in New York City. UN/Cia Pak

The DFA secretary’s statement issued on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Sunday, condemned the attacks against Myanmar security forces and acts of violence “which resulted in loss of civilian lives, destruction of homes and displacement of thousands.” It also expressed support for Myanmar’s government “in its effort to bring peace, stability, rule of law” in the area.

“The Foreign Ministers acknowledged that the situation in Rakhine State is a complex inter-communal issue with deep historical roots. They strongly urged all the parties involved to avoid actions that will further worsen the situation on the ground,” it reads.

Cayetano’s statement, issued supposedly on behalf of the 10-member bloc, clearly sidesteps authorities’ crimes against the minority Rohingya people in a crisis the United Nations’ human rights chief earlier this month called “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

Indonesian Foreign Affairs Minister Retno Marsudi told the Jakarta Post that the ASEAN chairperson’s statement was a result of a closed-door meeting of foreign ministers on the sidelines of the UN assembly on Saturday.

She described the decision of coming up with a statement from an informal gathering “quite out of the ordinary.”

The chair’s statement, she said, was expected to reflect the views of each ASEAN member-state. The final wording was left to Cayetano and no longer needed consensus of the ministers, Retno was quoted as saying.

She also offered to Cayetano Indonesia’s four-point recommendation to end the Rakhina crisis: Restoring stability and security; maximum restraint and non-violence; protection of all persons regardless of race and religion; and the importance of immediate access to humanitarian assistance.

Only the last element in Indonesia’s recommendation—that of access to humanitarian assistance—was included in Cayetano’s final statement.

‘Disproportionate’

Aman, Cayetano’s Malaysian counterpart, said Malaysia’s concerns were not reflected in the ASEAN chairman’s statement.

He said that while Malaysia condemned the attacks against Myanmar security by the Rohingyan army, it called the subsequent clearance operations by Myanmar authorities “disproportionate” as it has lead to deaths of civilians and displacement of Rohingyas.

“We express grave concerns over such atrocities which have unleashed a full-scale humanitarian crisis that the world simply ignore but be compelled to act upon,” Aman said.

More than 400,000 Rohingyas have fled to Bangladesh to escape murder and destruction of villages in the Western state of Rakhine.

The Rohingyas, a stateless Muslim minority in Buddhist-majority Myanmar, have long experience persecutions as they are believed to be illegal immigrants.

Malaysia also urged Myanmar to end the violence and resolve the refugee problem.

“Viable and long-term solutions to the root causes of the conflict must be found in order for the Rohingyas and the affected communities to be able to rebuild their lives.

Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been facing international pressure for her handling of the violence against Rohingyas.

The Nobel Peace Laureate, in a televised address, rejected international condemnation of the violence and insisted that “more than half” of Rohingya villages remain intact.

KUALA LUMPUR — Dissent surfaced again in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) after Malaysia disavowed a statement issued by the bloc’s chairman, the Philippines, as misrepresenting “the reality” of an exodus of 430,000 ethnic Rohingya from Myanmar.

The grouping of 10 nations in one of the world’s fastest growing regions has long struggled to reconcile conflicting interests in tackling issues such as China’s claims over the South China Sea and the crisis facing the Muslim Rohingya.

“The Philippines, as chair, tolerates the public manifestation of dissenting voices,” the Philippine foreign ministry said in a statement on Monday.

The move showed a “new level of maturity” in pushing ASEAN’s principle of consensus when dealing with issues affecting national interests, it added.

Malaysia had made its position clear “in several ASEAN meetings” in New York, the ministry said, adding that it had to also take into account the views of other members, however.

On Sunday, Malaysia “disassociated itself” from the ASEAN chairman’s statement on the grounds that it misrepresented the “reality of the situation” and did not identify the Rohingya as one of the affected communities.

Myanmar objects to the term Rohingya, saying the Muslims of its western state of Rakhine state are not a distinct ethnic group, but illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

Senior diplomats and foreign ministers of ASEAN nations discussed the contents of the statement on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York before it was published, the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and Malaysian government sources said.

No consensus was reached by the ASEAN foreign ministers, however, said two Malaysian government officials aware of the discussions.

The chairman’s statement released by the Philippines did not reflect Malaysia’s concerns, said one of the officials, who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue.

Malaysia has objected once before to a similar statement on the crisis in Myanmar’s western Rakhine state, but Sunday’s response was unexpected, as the grouping has an overriding policy of non-interference in domestic matters.

“Viable and long-term solutions to the root causes to the conflict must be found,” he said in a statement.

Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman

DISSENT REFLECTS STRAIN

Malaysia’s dissent, however, only reflects strained ties in ASEAN, said Shahriman Lockman, a senior analyst with the Institute of Strategic and International Studies in the country’s capital.

“What’s truly exceptional here is not Malaysia’s move to dissociate itself from the statement,” he told Reuters. “It’s the failure of the Philippines to attempt to reflect the views of all ASEAN member states.”

In the statement, the foreign ministers condemned the attacks on Myanmar’s security forces and “all acts of violence which resulted in loss of civilian lives, destruction of homes and displacement of large numbers of people”.

More than 400 people have died and 430,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled Rakhine, where an Aug. 25 attack on military and police outposts by Rohingya militants provoked a military offensive the United Nations calls “ethic cleansing”.

(Reporting by Joseph Sipalan and Praveen Menon in Kuala Lumpur, Manuel Mogato in the Philippines; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

BEIJING (AFP) – Beijing hit back Wednesday at US President Donald Trump’s veiled criticism of its territorial claims in the disputed South China Sea, countering that the United States was a greater threat to sovereignty.In his speech to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, Trump decried “threats to sovereignty” in Ukraine and the resource-rich South China Sea, without explicitly mentioning Russia or China.

“We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow,” Trump said.

China asserts sovereignty over almost all of the strategically vital waters in the face of rival claims from its Southeast Asian neighbours, and has rapidly turned reefs into artificial islands capable of hosting military planes.

The United States has conducted three “freedom of navigation” operations near islands held by China to challenge Beijing’s maritime claims since Trump took office in January.

“For some time now, some countries have used the pretext of freedom of navigation to bring their planes and fleets near the South China Sea,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Wednesday.

“Actually, I think this is behaviour that has threatened the sovereignty of South China Sea countries,” Lu told a regular news briefing.

Lu said the situation in the sea “has been cooling down” thanks to efforts by China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

“I hope that this situation can be respected by relevant countries,” he said.

The spokesman also called for “restraint” in response to Trump’s warning that he will “totally destroy” North Korea if it threatens the US or its allies.

Lu reiterated Beijing’s call for efforts to bring the nuclear issue “back to the right track of peaceful settlement through dialogue and consultation.”

Liu Yunshan (L, front), a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, holds talks with Tran Quoc Vuong, a member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) Central Committee, Secretary of the CPV Central Committee and Head of the Committee’s Inspection Commission, in Hanoi, Vietnam, Sept. 18, 2017. (Xinhua/Pang Xinglei)

BEIJING — China and Vietnam’s Communist Parties have a “shared destiny” and the two nations have huge potential for economic cooperation, a senior official said on Tuesday during a visit to Vietnam, which has clashed with China over the South China Sea.

Though the two countries are run by Communist parties, they are deeply suspicious of each other and relations have been strained over the past few years because of the dispute in the strategic South China Sea.

China has appeared uneasy at Vietnam’s efforts to rally Southeast Asian countries over the busy waterway as well as at its neighbor’s growing defense ties with the United States, Japan and India.

In July, under pressure from Beijing, Vietnam suspended oil drilling in offshore waters that are also claimed by China.

However, Hanoi and Beijing have also tried to prevent tensions from getting too out of control, and senior officials from two countries make fairly regular visits to each other.

Liu Yunshan, a member of the Chinese Communist Party’s elite Standing Committee which runs the country, told Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc in Hanoi that the two parties “constitute a community of shared destiny with strategic significance”, the official Xinhua news agency reported.

“The sound and stable development of the bilateral ties will help to solidify the ruling position of the two parties, which is in the interests of the two parties and people of the two nations,” Xinhua cited Liu as saying.

The two economies are highly complementary, with huge potential for practical cooperation, he added.

While the report made no direction mention of the South China Sea, it quoted Liu as suggesting the two countries “properly manage and control their divergences, so as to create favorable environment for bilateral cooperation”.

China claims nearly all the South China Sea, through which an estimated $3 trillion in international trade passes each year. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Taiwan also have claims.

Indonesia’s Deputy Minister for Maritime Affairs Arif Havas Oegroseno points at the location of North Natuna Sea on a new map of Indonesia during talks with reporters in Jakarta, Indonesia, July 14, 2017. REUTERS/Beawiharta

China says it has sovereignty over all the South China Sea north of its “nine dash line.” On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague said this claim by China was not valid. But China and the Philippine government then chose to ignore international law.

When US PresidentDonald Trump met Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc in May, he sent a clear message: by patting the backs of authoritarian leaders, the US is complicit in Vietnam’s rights abuses.

Trump is no stranger to brushing shoulders with autocratic leaders. Allegations of cosying up to Russian President Vladimir Putin aside, he has praised Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, Egyptian leader Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

But Trump extending hands to Vietnam’s leader is perhaps unique given the two countries’ past animosity, and particularly since Hanoi’s crackdown on opposition voices, seen by many as its toughest in years.

A girl walks past a poster promoting Vietnam’s 14th National Assembly election in Hanoi last year. The ruling party has launched a crackdown on dissenting voices as the US has relaxed its push for improved human rights in the country. Photo: Reuters

Vietnam’s leaders – some of the most authoritarian in Southeast Asia – are determined to silence all forms of dissent that cause people to question the one-party state.

Last month, President Tran Dai Quang called for tougher internet controls on such voices and to “prevent news sites and blogs with bad and dangerous content”. Two weeks ago, authorities in Thai Binh province arrested a member of the online advocacy group, the Brotherhood for Democracy, for “subversion” in relation to his involvement in a land dispute.

The case highlighted Vietnam’s intolerance for such dissent and the political elite have shown they will cling to power by any means – harassing activists and bloggers, extracting confessions through intimidation, physical assault and imprisonment are often reported. So far this year, Vietnamese authorities have reportedly arrested 15 people for anti-state actions.

“By inviting Vietnam’s Prime Minister to the White House and then failing to raise any human rights issues, President Trump basically gave Hanoi the green light to initiate a renewed crackdown on rights activists,” said Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division. “Trump’s change in Vietnam policy amounted to throwing out the window the human rights concerns of the Obama administration, which had been one of Vietnam’s strongest critics.”

Robertson said he was not surprised to see Vietnam taking advantage of Trump’s apathy – and lack of US criticism – to ramp up its crackdown and hit prominent dissidents with a slew of long prison sentences.

“It looks like Vietnam is taking advantage of this current situation to try and set the human rights situation back to an earlier, more repressive past.”

US President Barack Obama gestures at Vietnam’s President Tran Dai Quang in Hanoi. The former US leader was more critical of the Southeast Asian nation’s human rights abuses, than the current US President Donald Trump. Photo: Reuters

But alleviating US pressure on Vietnam did not start with Trump. Though the Obama administration was known for pushing governments to improve their human rights situations, the former US leader last year lifted a long-standing arms embargo on Vietnam, which critics warned could remove incentives for the Southeast Asian nation to improve its human rights situation.

[TRUMP’S] PRIMARY INTEREST IS IN STRIKING TRADE DEALS WHICH ARE MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE US WITH FOREIGN PARTNERS

But under the Trump administration, Vietnam – and many other authoritarian states – have even less to worry about in terms of US wrist-slapping. The US president has not been shy in his praise of many hardline leaders around the world and has often touted a foreign policy that seeks to move away from the liberal, human rights-focused agenda of past presidents. Washington’s retreat from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which included rules aimed at promoting worker’s rights, left Vietnam with even fewer reasons to worry about international opinion.

Oliver Turner, an international relations lecturer from the University of Edinburgh, said a fundamental aspect of Trump’s administration was its tunnel vision.

“[Trump’s] primary interest is in striking trade deals which are more beneficial to the US with foreign partners, and it won’t be a surprise to see his administration negotiate these deals in the absence of concern for their records on human rights,” he said.

Turner said China’s growing presence and influence in Southeast Asia was also an critical factor, as Beijing surfaces as an attractive alternative to the US by offering funding without the human rights-oriented conditions that often came with US aid. But Vietnam and China have historical animosity, leaving Vietnam as one of Washington’s few remaining allies in the region.

“I also think that with the Philippines, and to a lesser extent Thailand in particular, shifting their diplomatic allegiances towards China, relations with Vietnam will probably become more of a priority for Washington, making a future appeasement of human rights abuses more likely,” he said.

Despite having its own history of rights abuses in Southeast Asia – including an illegal war in Laos, wanton bombing in Vietnam and Cambodia and the backing of a genocidal regime in Indonesia – the US can still institute positive change in the region. Capable of applying concerted pressure on human rights issues, most dictators have to at least sit up and appear to listen to the US, Robertson said.

But such a prospect – US influence as a force for good in the region – may be no more than a pipe dream.

“The US has a role to play in curbing human rights abuses in Vietnam, most prominently through economic diplomacy and tying trade to the issue of human rights … this seems unlikely over the next four years,” Turner said.

“Washington could also rally like-minded allies in Asean [The Association of Southeast Asian Nations] to exert pressure on Vietnam, but Trump’s unilateralist approach to global affairs will likely have little time for, or faith in, such institutions.”

As long as Trump is in office – and is focused on threats like a nuclear-armed North Korea and domestic politics – residents of Southeast Asia may have to rely on themselves to promote free speech and other freedoms.

“Trump’s supporters will not measure his success in terms of upholding human rights, and Trump knows that, so it isn’t a priority for him,” Turner said.

“I think on the issue of human rights, it will increasingly be up to the Asean community to police itself.”

MANILA (AFP) – The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is to sign a free-trade agreement with Hong Kong in November, a Philippine government official said Saturday, following three years of talks.The Chinese special administrative region began free-trade negotiations with ASEAN in 2014, four years after the 10-nation economic bloc signed a similar trade deal with China in 2010.

“This would… send a positive signal for the international community of ASEAN’s resolute commitment to free trade and open markets,” Rodolfo told reporters.

He gave no details of the two agreements, which dealt with lowering import duties and cutting barriers to investment.

The agreement was reached as ASEAN economic ministers held a dialogue in Manila Saturday with Hong Kong government officials.

ASEAN, an economic bloc with a combined population of more than 600 million, is Hong Kong’s second-largest trading partner after mainland China, according to the territory’s Trade and Industry Department website.

Hong Kong also acts as an important entrepot for trade between mainland China and ASEAN, an economic grouping made up of Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

It has remained a separate customs entity from mainland China since the city’s 1997 handover by Britain.

ASEAN members have established a free-trade area among themselves aiming to slash tariffs on most goods to zero and minimise non-tariff barriers. They have also signed free-trade deals with key trading partners such as Japan and China.

Rodolfo said the Hong Kong deals are to be signed in November, when the Philippines hosts an ASEAN summit.

ASEAN also has free-trade deals with India, Australia and New Zealand, and South Korea.

A visit to the White House is a diplomatic plum that world leaders covet. So why is President Trump bestowing this honor on Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, who jailed an opposition leader and is a suspect in a corruption scandal that spans the globe?

Mr. Najib will visit the White House next week for a presidential photo-op that could help him win the next general election and imperil Malaysia’s democracy. Yet it isn’t clear that Mr. Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson are getting anything in return for associating with a leader their own Justice Department is investigating. This could set them up for a repeat of the way Mr. Najib humiliated Barack Obama.

Mr. Najib oversaw the creation of 1MDB, a state-owned fund that was supposed to attract foreign investment. The U.S. Justice Department alleges that the Prime Minister and his associates looted the fund of $4.5 billion. The DOJ has filed civil lawsuits to freeze more than $1.6 billion of assets allegedly stolen from the fund. Five other nations are also investigating, and Singapore has convicted five financiers of money laundering and fraud. Mr. Najib hasn’t been charged and denies wrongdoing, and Malaysia’s Attorney General cleared him.

Under Mr. Najib, Malaysian authorities also conducted a six-year prosecution against opposition leader and former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim on dubious charges of sodomy, for which he was sentenced to five years in prison. That legal farce helped Mr. Najib’s party win a narrow victory in the 2013 election.

So how should the U.S. engage a troubled Malaysia? Mr. Obama cozied up to Mr. Najib and chose to ignore the prosecution of Mr. Anwar when he made the first visit by a U.S. President in 60 years to Kuala Lumpur in April 2014. Eight months later, he invited Mr. Najib for a showy round of golf in Hawaii.

But that precedent is not consistent with Mr. Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp” of Washington politics. Two months after that golf round Mr. Anwar was jailed again. And shortly after Mr. Obama made nice with Mr. Najib, Frank White Jr. , who served as co-chair of President Obama’s re-election committee before becoming a lobbyist for Malaysia, sold a stake in a 1MDB-linked solar technology firm back to the fund for $69 million.

The benefits of communing with Mr. Najib aren’t obvious. Perhaps Mr. Tillerson thinks Malaysia will help tighten the financial screws on North Korea, which has long used the country as a business hub. But Mr. Najib isn’t likely to stop his strategic drift toward China. Keeping 1MDB afloat will require cash infusions, and China, eager to help fellow authoritarians, can deploy its One Belt, One Road slush fund. Mr. Najib can then buy off the opposition and consolidate power.

If Malaysia slides into dictatorship, it will almost surely fall into Beijing’s orbit. The U.S. relationship depends on Malaysia remaining a viable democracy. That’s why helping Mr. Najib at this critical moment is a mistake.

Mr. Trump will be told that it’s too late to cancel the meeting, but the U.S. can find a diplomatic excuse in Hurricanes Harvey and Irma or congressional battles. Any embarrassment is better than giving a scandal-tainted leader a White House photo-op.

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said that state fund 1MDB has cleared over 3 billion ringgit (S$947.1 million) in debt over the past two years. He had chaired 1MDB’s advisory board until it was dissolved in May 2016.PHOTO: REUTERS

Indian PM Narendra Modi is visiting Myanmar at a tricky time when the country and its de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi are increasingly coming under sharp international criticism due to the plight of Rohingya Muslims.

Myanmar is “a valued neighbor and a close friend of India’s,” said PM Modi in a personalized email that he sent to the Indian community in Myanmar ahead of his first official visit to the Southeast Asian nation.

Modi landed in Myanmar on Tuesday afternoon as part of a five-day foreign tour that already took him to the southeastern Chinese city of Xiamen to attend this year’s BRICS summit.

In the capital Naypyitaw, the Indian prime minister is scheduled to hold talks with President Htin Kyaw, State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and other high-ranking officials. He is also holding a community event in Yangon to address the Indian diaspora there.

In addition to Naypyitaw and Yangon, Modi is traveling to the ancient city of Bagan, where he will visit its famous Buddhist shrines, some of which date back to the 11th century. He is expected to announce Indian financial aid for their conservation. The two countries are looking to strengthen their cooperation in a host of areas related to security, trade and energy, among others.

Modi’s trip comes at a time when Myanmar is facing stringent global censure due to the ongoing Rohingya crisis. The estimated 1.1-million-strong Rohingya are a stateless ethnic minority who are reviled and accused of being illegal immigrants in Myanmar. Many people in Myanmar even reject the term “Rohingya,” fearing that it gives political recognition to a group they regard as “Bengali” foreign nationals.

People outside the country, though, recognize that many Rohingya have lived in Myanmar for centuries and call on the nation’s government to grant them citizenship, freedom of movement and basic rights.

Ethnic and religious tensions between Buddhists and Muslims over the past couple of years have turned the situation volatile in the country’s western Rakhine state. The latest flare up of violence in recent days has already displaced tens of thousands and forced them to seek refuge in neighboring Bangladesh.

Myanmar, which denies persecuting the Rohingya, says its security forces are tackling “terrorists” who have launched attacks in Rakhine.

The current state of affairs has provoked outrage in a number of Muslim countries worldwide, prompting them to censure Myanmar’s government and its de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi. But she has limited authority over the actions of the nation’s security forces, as Myanmar’s 2008 constitution gives the military power over internal security, defense and border affairs. Those ministries are headed by serving military men, and the civilian government lacks enough authority to act in areas related to security policy.

THE FLIGHT OF ROHINGYA MUSLIMS FROM MYANMAR TO BANGLADESH

A series of coordinated attacks by Rohingya insurgents on Myanmar security forces in the north of Myanmar’s Rakhine State triggered a crackdown by Myanmar forces that has sent a stream of Rohingya villagers fleeing to Bangladesh. About 400 people have been killed in the clashes in Buddist-majority Myanmar.

Deportation looms

In this context, Modi is expected to discuss with Myanmar officials about the prevailing situation. But it is unlikely that the Indian leader would make any statements that would be perceived in Myanmar as offering support to the Rohingya cause.

“India is a member of the UN Human Rights Council. They (Rohingyas) have been the target of the most serious abuse ever chronicled. How can the government think of deporting them when they are not recognized in their own country? It is against all canons of international law,” Meenakshi Ganguly of Human Rights Watch recently told DW.

Others like Ravi Hemadri of the Development and Justice Initiative (DAJI), an NGO, says the government’s proposed move is a complete rollback of its age-old refugee policy. India’s Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea challenging the government’s move.

Competing with China

The Rohingya is not the sole issue on Modi’s agenda, however. As part of his “Act East” policy, Modi is attempting to bolster India’s economic and strategic ties with countries in North and Southeast Asia. Political analysts say it’s also a move aimed at containing growing Chinese power and influence in the region.

So Modi’s visit presents an opportunity to boost trade and investment relations between the two sides. India views Myanmar as its gateway to Southeast Asia and ASEAN nations. The two nations share a long land border of over 1,600 kilometers and a maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal.

Still, annual bilateral trade currently stands at a mere $2.2 billion (€1.85 billion), far less than Myanmar’s commerce with China.

Modi will therefore look to advance initiatives such as a trilateral highway project connecting India’s northeast with Myanmar and Thailand. He will also discuss the Kaladan transport project connecting Kolkata’s seaport with Sittwe seaport in Myanmar.

Indian analysts believe there is a sense of urgency in New Delhi to push these projects forward against the backdrop of China’s rapid progress in implementing its “Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).” BRI is President Xi Jinping’s ambitious project that seeks to link China with other parts of Asia and Europe through multibillion dollar investments in ports, roads, railways, power plants and other infrastructure.

Observers say India’s economic agenda in Myanmar could be derailed by security challenges, as Sittwe – the capital of violence-prone Rakhine state – is the site of an Indian-built port that is key to New Delhi’s connectivity plans in the country.

HANOI — Vietnam on Tuesday issued a strong condemnation of Chinese military live-fire exercises in the disputed South China Sea, amid rising tension between the two countries.

The Maritime Safety Administration of China’s southern province of Hainan, which oversees the South China Sea, said last month there would be live fire drills around the Paracel Islands, which Vietnam claims, until September 2.

“Vietnam once again asserts that (we) will resolutely protect our sovereignty and our legitimate rights and interests in the East Sea (South China Sea) through peaceful measures that are suitable with international laws,” the statement said.

China claims nearly all the South China Sea, through which an estimated $3 trillion in international trade passes each year. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Taiwan also have claims.

Tension between China and neighboring Vietnam is at its highest in three years over the disputed waters.

Vietnam suspended oil drilling in offshore waters that are also claimed by China in July under pressure from Beijing.

China has appeared uneasy at Vietnam’s efforts to rally Southeast Asian countries over the South China Sea as well as at its growing defense relationships with the United States, Japan and India.

Indonesia’s Deputy Minister for Maritime Affairs Arif Havas Oegroseno points at the location of North Natuna Sea on a new map of Indonesia during talks with reporters in Jakarta, Indonesia, July 14, 2017. REUTERS/Beawiharta

China says it has sovereignty over all the South China Sea north of its “nine dash line.” On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague said this claim by China was not valid. But China and the Philippine government then chose to ignore international law.

Schedule of naval operations is set for the first time in effort to pressure Beijing over its maritime claims

Photo: USS Dewey

By Gordon Lubold and Jeremy Page
The Wall Street Journal

Updated Sept. 1, 2017 6:25 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—The Pentagon for the first time has set a schedule of naval patrols in the South China Sea in an attempt to create a more consistent posture to counter China’s maritime claims there, injecting a new complication into increasingly uneasy relations between the two powers.

The U.S. Pacific Command has developed a plan to conduct so-called freedom-of-navigation operations two to three times over the next few months, according to several U.S. officials, reinforcing the U.S. challenge to what it sees as excessive Chinese maritime claims in the disputed South China Sea. Beijing claims sovereignty over all South China Sea islands and their adjacent waters.

The plan marks a significant departure from such military operations in the region during the Obama administration, when officials sometimes struggled with when, how and where to conduct those patrols. They were canceled or postponed based on other political factors after what some U.S. officials said were contentious internal debates.

The idea behind setting a schedule contrasts with the more ad hoc approach to conducting freedom-of-navigation operations, known as “fonops” in military parlance, and establish more regularity in the patrols. Doing so may help blunt Beijing’s argument that the patrols amount to a destabilizing provocation each time they occur, U.S. officials said.

Chinese officials didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the latest U.S. plans. Beijing has accused the U.S. of militarizing navigation in the region by conducting military patrols. There have been three navigation patrols so far under President Donald Trump; there were four during the Obama administration, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Officials described the new plan as a more predetermined way of conducting such patrols than in the past, though not immutable. The plan is in keeping with the Trump administration’s approach to military operations, which relies on giving commanders leeway to determine the U.S. posture. In keeping with policies against announcing military operations before they occur, officials declined to disclose where and when they would occur.

The added military pressure on China comes while the U.S. is seeking greater cooperation from Beijing in reining in North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile program. The Trump administration has complained that Beijing hasn’t done all it can to pressure its allies in Pyongyang not to develop weapons or threaten the U.S. and its territories and allies.

In a new facet, some freedom-of-navigation patrols may be “multi-domain” patrols, using not only U.S. Navy warships but U.S. military aircraft as well.

Thus far, there have been three publicly disclosed freedom-of-navigation operations under the Trump administration. The last one was conducted on Aug. 10 by the navy destroyer, the USS John S. McCain, which days later collided with a cargo ship, killing 10 sailors.

That patrol around Mischief Reef—one of seven fortified artificial islands that Beijing has built in the past three years in the disputed Spratlys archipelago—also included an air component.

According to U.S. officials, two P-8 Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft flew above the McCain in a part of the operation that hadn’t been previously disclosed. More navigation patrols using warships likely now will include aircraft overhead, they said.

P-8 Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft

Pacific Command officials had no comment on the matter.

The first such patrol under Mr. Trump was conducted by the destroyer USS Dewey May 24 around Mischief Reef. In July, the guided-missile destroyer USS Stethem conducted a patrol near Triton Island in the Paracel Island chain in the South China Sea, coming to within 12 nautical miles of the island.

Together, the moves amount to a more extensive U.S. posture in the South China Sea, where the U.S. has attempted to counter what it sees as excessive Chinese claims around two island chains, the Paracels and the Spratlys, where Beijing has conducted reclamation activities, building or expanding islands using sand dredged from the ocean floor to establish runways, ports, buildings and other facilities for military purposes.

Those structures worry the U.S. and other nations, which believe China’s presence there could impede shipping lanes through which billions of dollars of cargo transit each year.

The U.S. doesn’t make claims to any of the islands, but conducts the patrols to challenge China’s claims, which overlap with those of Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan and the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally.

Col. Rob Manning, a Pentagon spokesman, said U.S. forces operate throughout the Asia-Pacific region every day, including in the South China Sea. “All operations are conducted in accordance with international law and demonstrate that the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows.”

Col. Manning declined to comment on the new Pacific Command plan.

Countries in the region have welcomed the more unhesitating Pentagon approach under Mr. Trump, said Bonnie Glaser, director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank in Washington, and a former consultant to the Pentagon and State Department.

“I think there has already been a positive reaction from the region that we see in the aftermath of the three fonops we’ve seen so far,” Ms. Glaser said.

She said the Obama administration was “too risk averse” when it came to freedom-of-navigation patrols. “We need to conduct fonops on a regular and consistent way that sends a signal about our unwillingness to accept excessive maritime claims, to challenge those claims, and to underscore that our operations in the South China Sea are no different in other parts of the globe,” she said.

A former Obama administration official said a move to increase the number of navigation patrols is a good idea, but must be accompanied by a broader strategy.

An aerial shot of part of the Spratly Islands in April 21.Photo: TED ALJIBE/AFP/Getty Images

“I think regularized fonops are a good idea,” said David Shear, an assistant secretary of defense at the Pentagon under Mr. Obama. “I think they should be conducted in the context of a broader South China Sea and regional strategy, and it’s not clear to me that this administration has devised a strategy for the South China Sea or the region, so I’m not sure what purpose the fonops serve outside of that context.”

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis spoke to U.S. aims in the region in an address earlier this year at a security conference in Singapore, declaring Washington has an “enduring commitment” in Asia based on strategic interests and “shared values of free people, free markets and a strong and vibrant economic partnership.”

The Obama administration’s move to “rebalance” U.S. military and economic attention to accentuate Asia was widely criticized, especially by Republicans. But Mr. Shear said Mr. Mattis’s remarks don’t spell out a new approach.

“This administration has repealed the rebalance but it hasn’t replaced it,” said Mr. Shear, now a senior adviser at McLarty Associates, an international trade consulting firm in Washington, D.C.

Pentagon officials often were frustrated with the process of planning and conducting navigation patrols under the Obama administration. Typically, officials said, such plans would be forwarded from U.S. Pacific Command to the Pentagon and then vetted by the State Department and the White House National Security Council before being approved or disapproved depending on the White House’s own set of political priorities with the Chinese.

The chief of U.S. Pacific Command, Adm. Harry Harris, has publicly and privately pushed for more of these kinds of operations, and on a more regular basis. Speaking to reporters last year, Adm. Harris put it simply: “More is better” when it comes to navigation patrols.

Write to Gordon Lubold at Gordon.Lubold@wsj.com and Jeremy Page at jeremy.page@wsj.com

China says it has sovereignty over all the South China Sea north of its “nine dash line.” On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague said this claim by China was not valid. But China and the Philippine government then chose to ignore international law.